Anointing of the Sick and It's Proper Minister

[JesuitLoyola]

I have a question. Often when the sacrament of anointing of the sick is cited in scripture, people turn to Mark 6:13;

They drove out many demons, and they anointed with oil many who were sick and cured them. (NAB)

My confusion lies in the fact that, though the apostles were curing the sick and driving out demons, they had not been ordained priests yet by Christ. (which would come at the last supper). Does this mean that there could be some efficacy of non-clergy praying for the sick and anointing them with oil? I know the proper minister of the sacrament is a priest, but could there be another kind of non-sacramental healing that could take place if a layman prays for another and anoints them with oil?

 

[benedictgal]

I have a question. Often when the sacrament of anointing of the sick is cited in scripture, people turn to Mark 6:13;

They drove out many demons, and they anointed with oil many who were sick and cured them. (NAB)

My confusion lies in the fact that, though the apostles were curing the sick and driving out demons, they had not been ordained priests yet by Christ. (which would come at the last supper). Does this mean that there could be some efficacy of non-clergy praying for the sick and anointing them with oil? I know the proper minister of the sacrament is a priest, but could there be another kind of non-sacramental healing that could take place if a layman prays for another and anoints them with oil?

I believe that this would constitute a great deal of confusion among the faithful. Please note what Ecclesia de Mysterio states:

The Apostolate to the Sick

1. In this area, the non-ordained faithful can often provide valuable collaboration. (102) Innumerable works of charity to the sick are constantly provided by the non-ordained faithful either individually or through community apostolates. These constitute an important Christian presence to sick and suffering of the greatest importance. The non-ordained faithful particularly assist the sick by being with them in difficult moments, encouraging them to receive the Sacraments of Penance and the Anointing of the Sick, by helping them to have the disposition to make a good individual confession as well as to prepare them to receive the Anointing of the Sick. In using sacramentals, the non-ordained faithful should ensure that these are in no way regarded as sacraments whose administration is proper and exclusive to the Bishop and to the priest. Since they are not priests, in no instance may the non-ordained perform anointings either with the Oil of the Sick or ony other oil.

1. With regard to the administration of this sacrament, ecclesiastical legislation reiterates the theologically certain doctrine and the age old usage of the Church (103) which regards the priest as its only valid minister. (104) This norm is completely coherent with the theological mystery signified and realized by means of priestly service.

It must also be affirmed that the reservation of the ministry of Anointing to the priest is related to the connection of this sacrament to the forgiveness of sin and the worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist. No other person may act as ordinary or extraordinary minister of the sacrament since such constitutes simulation of the sacrament. (105)

This document, promulgated by the Holy See in 1997, remains in force. Incidentally, one of the signers of this document was the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in his capacity as prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

 

[karennascargo3]

My thoughts are that, although they had not yet been officially made priests, Jesus Himself nonetheless gave them the authority to perform such duties.

MHO is that the main reason they had not yet been ordained as priests, is that there was already enough trouble brewing between Jesus with the religious leaders. Jesus could endure it, not only because He was God’s Son, but because he had the Holy Spirit. Jesus knew the Apostles would not have that power and strength until after the Holy Spirit come at Pentecost. It would be bad enough they drove out demons and anointed, but if Jesus had ordained them as ‘priests’, it most likely may have been the beginning and end of Christianity. It was a matter of timing.

Jesus needed to have His disciples ‘prepared’. He had to give them authority over things like demons and sickness in order to prepare them to take the reins of our faith as soon as He departed. In other words, they already were ‘priests-to-be’, so being the first ‘priests’ of Christianity, Jesus probably wanted to see how they would handle such things so they could be corrected and encouraged prior to his death – since there was no other authority figure they could go to but to Christ, being the first of their kind.

 

[JesuitLoyola]

So is there any point in general to praying with someone who is sick because it’s not sacramental? Or is it proper as long as there is no oil involved? Again I would like to go back to my original point-it’s not proper to anoint with oil unless one is part of the clergy; but the apostles were not priests either and had not even received the gift of the holy spirit yet (which the modern catholic laity have from their confirmation) and they seem to have done quite well in terms of healing in God’s name.

 

[OraLabora]

Praying is for/with the sick is always OK.

The issue for the anointing of the sick, is that it is a sacrament that can only be validly administered by an ordained priest. Although the apostles were not made priests officially, the priests are the natural successors to the apostles through apostolic succession. So only priests have validly received the authority from Jesus through the apostles to administer this sacrament.

 

[JesuitLoyola]

Gotcha, that makes sense, and in the strictest sense the sacrament itself goes be on prayers for the sick because it removes sin as well which is obviously something that is only done by those with the authority given them by Christ; the priests and bishops.Here is what I found out upon looking further: it appears the oil is the matter proper to the sacrament and as such is not to be considered a merely physical thing but a sign of the spiritual cure. The internal change, which is the cleansing of sin, is done through physical means because that is how God expresses the sacraments to us in general. This in itself is much greater than the physical healing and should never be emulated by the laity, though prayer is acceptable. Thanks everyone for answering my questions and pointing me in the right direction.

 

[benedictgal]

So is there any point in general to praying with someone who is sick because it’s not sacramental? Or is it proper as long as there is no oil involved? Again I would like to go back to my original point-it’s not proper to anoint with oil unless one is part of the clergy; but the apostles were not priests either and had not even received the gift of the holy spirit yet (which the modern catholic laity have from their confirmation) and they seem to have done quite well in terms of healing in God’s name.

You did ask, in your original quesiton:

I know the proper minister of the sacrament is a priest, but could there be another kind of non-sacramental healing that could take place if a layman prays for another and anoints them with oil?

But, as others have pointed out, the Apostolic band is a unique case, since, eventually, they would be ordained and have the ability to exercise their ministry.

Now, there is nothing wrong with asking someone to pray for you if you are sick. However, we also have to bear in mind the Church’s definition, as explained by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (headed, at the time, by the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger):

1. The «charism of healing» in the New Testament

Not only did wondrous healings confirm the power of the Gospel proclamation in Apostolic times, but the New Testament refers also to Jesus’ real and proper transmission of the power to heal illnesses to his Apostles and to the first preachers of the Gospel. In the call of the Twelve to their first mission, according to the accounts of Matthew and Luke, the Lord gave them «the power to drive out unclean spirits and to cure every disease and illness» (Mt 10:1; cf. Lk 9:1), and commanded them: «Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, drive out demons» (Mt 10:8). In sending out the seventy-two disciples, the Lord charges them: «cure the sick» (Lk 10:9). The power to heal, therefore, is given within a missionary context, not for their own exaltation, but to confirm their mission.

The Acts of the Apostles refers in general to the wonders worked by them: «many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles» (Acts 2:43; cf. 5:12). These were amazing deeds that manifested the truth and the power of their mission. However, apart from these brief general references, the Acts of the Apostles refers above all to the miraculous healings worked by individual preachers of the Gospel: Stephen (cf. Acts 6:8), Philip (cf. Acts 8:6-7), and, above all, Peter (cf. Acts 3:1-10; 5:15; 9:33-34, 40-41) and Paul (cf. Acts 14:3, 8-10; 15:12; 19: 11-12; 20:9-10; 28: 8-9).

In the conclusion to the Gospel of Mark, as well as in the Letter to the Galatians, as seen above, the perspective is broadened. The wondrous healings are not limited to the activity of the Apostles and certain of the central figures in the first preaching of the Gospel. In this perspective, the references to the «charisms of healing» in 1 Cor 12:9, 28,30 acquire special importance. The meaning of charism is per se quite broad * «a generous gift» * and in this context it refers to «gifts of healing obtained.» These graces, in the plural, are attributed to an individual (cf. 1 Cor 12:9), and are not, therefore, to be understood in a distributive sense, as the gifts of healing received by those who themselves have been healed, but rather as a gift granted to a person to obtain graces of healing for others. This is given in uno Spiritu, but nothing is specified about how that person obtains these healings. It would not be farfetched to think that it happens by means of prayer, perhaps accompanied by some symbolic gesture.

In the Letter of James, reference is made to the Church’s action, by means of the priests, directed toward the salvation * in a physical sense as well * of the sick. But this is not to be understood as a wondrous healing; it is different from the «charisms of healing» of 1 Cor 12:9. «Is anyone sick among you? He should call for the priests of the Church and have them pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord and the prayer of faith will save the sick person and will raise him up. If he has committed any sins, he will be forgiven» (Jas 5:14-15). This refers to a sacramental action: anointing of the sick with oil and prayer «over him» and not simply «for him,» as if it were only a prayer of intercession or petition; it is rather an efficacious action on the sick person.(18) The verbs «will save» and «will raise up» do not suggest an action aimed exclusively or predominantly at physical healing, but in a certain way include it. The first verb, even though the other times it appears in the Letter of James it refers to spiritual salvation (cf. 1:21; 2:14; 4:12; 5:20), is also used in the New Testament in the sense of «to heal» (cf. Mt 9:21; Mk 5:28, 34; 6:56; 10:52; Lk 8:48); the second, while having at times the sense of «to rise» (cf. Mt 10:8; 11:5; 14:2), is also used to indicate the action of «raising up» a person who is lying down because of illness, by healing the person in a wondrous fashion (cf. Mt 9:5; Mk 1:31; 9:27;Acts 3:7).

You can read the whole document here at:

adoremus.org/CDF-Healing.html

I hope this document helps to answer your question.

 

[Diaconia]

I have a question. Often when the sacrament of anointing of the sick is cited in scripture, people turn to Mark 6:13;

They drove out many demons, and they anointed with oil many who were sick and cured them. (NAB)

My confusion lies in the fact that, though the apostles were curing the sick and driving out demons, they had not been ordained priests yet by Christ. (which would come at the last supper). Does this mean that there could be some efficacy of non-clergy praying for the sick and anointing them with oil? I know the proper minister of the sacrament is a priest, but could there be another kind of non-sacramental healing that could take place if a layman prays for another and anoints them with oil?

Actually the better scriptural reference for Anointing of the Sick is from James 5:14-15):
Is anyone among you sick? He should summon the presbyters of the church, and they should pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise him up. If he has committed any sins, he will be forgiven.

Presbyteroi = elders, the English word “priest” comes from the Greek word “presbyter.”

It’s important for us to remember that the office of apostle is one that was superior to that of the modern-day bishop. We talk today about bishops being the apostles successors, and that is true. But the office of the Twelve had more authority and power than our present-day bishops.

The chosen Twelve worked miracles, exorcized demons and cured sick people before the Last Supper. They had the authority of Christ when he sent them out; they weren’t “ordained” as we think of it at the Last Supper.

Nor were they “ordained” at Pentecost - Jesus gave them an additional gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, but they had been working miracles in the name of Jesus prior to that.

The first time in scripture we see something that is similar to our modern-day ordination rite (laying on of hands) was at the choosing of the seven deacons in Acts 6.

Even the choosing of Matthias to replace Judas was done simply with the authority of the Apostles. Peter required that the man must have been with them from the baptism of the Lord until His ascension. They prayed after finding two men who had that quality and chose the first Apostolic successor by lots.

The passage from James above shows the linkage between the forgiveness of sin and the anointing of the sick person. That’s why a priest is required, they can forgive sins in the name of Christ.

God bless,